PSA: Pve groups are going from 24 down to 12

BlueRaven

“Reduced player group size limitations from a global maximum of 24 to 12 in all activities, rather than only in Cyrodiil and Trials.”

This will negatively effect our guilds wb runs and my housing guilds house tours.

Awful change.

🙁

DreadDaedroth

No fun allowed.
Why reduced the numbers of players in a group doing overland content from Roleplay to housing to skyshard hunts, world bosses run?

Vlad9425

Worst change for PvP now coming to PVE. GG ZOS.

xhaven

Yea, this is an un-needed change and it just seems to be setting up ESO to start failing as an mmo. I dont want to see this go the way of Swtor. Sad times if this goes through Zos.

Kwoung

BlueRaven wrote: »

“Reduced player group size limitations from a global maximum of 24 to 12 in all activities, rather than only in Cyrodiil and Trials.”

This will negatively effect our guilds wb runs and my housing guilds house tours.

Awful change.

🙁

Yes, continual nerfs to guilds seem to be the way things are going. We have numerous events a week that draw participation from 16-24 members. Apparently guilds having fun together isn't a priority.

trackdemon5512

Aren’t drops capped at 12 ppl for the purposes of everything but Dolmens, Harrowstorms, Geysers, etc? And for that matter aren’t public dungeons also capped at 12?

This change really only affects a small segment of the population and is easily worked around. 95% to 98% of the time players aren’t in groups larger than 12 (outside of pre Cyro changes) and this is probably just cementing the fact that sets are now designed to cap at 12 max and groups larger than such have no purpose for said size outside of communication.

DreadDaedroth

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Aren’t drops capped at 12 ppl for the purposes of everything but Dolmens, Harrowstorms, Geysers, etc? And for that matter aren’t public dungeons also capped at 12?

This change really only affects a small segment of the population and is easily worked around. 95% to 98% of the time players aren’t in groups larger than 12 (outside of pre Cyro changes) and this is probably just cementing the fact that sets are now designed to cap at 12 max and groups larger than such have no purpose for said size outside of communication.

In overland PvE it shouldn't matter sets interaction, loot size... Get 24 played go around houses, kill world bosses... have fun with old friends a nd new guild members.

Knockmaker

When we were strongly arguing against the group size reduction from 24 to 12 in PvP, most people didn't even bother raising their voice, thinking it wasn't affecting them as PvE players. Here you go, so much for let sleeping dogs lie. Another good lesson why this community should stand together pvpers and pvers.

DreadDaedroth

Knockmaker wrote: »

When we were strongly arguing against the group size reduction from 24 to 12 in PvP, most people didn't even bother raising their voice, thinking it wasn't affecting them as PvE players. Here you go, so much for let sleeping dogs lie. Another good lesson why this community should stand together pvpers and pvers.

Well kinda different as some pvp players enjoy 12 players groups opposed to 24 ones. Even if it's no sense.

Knockmaker

DreadDaedroth wrote: »

Knockmaker wrote: »

When we were strongly arguing against the group size reduction from 24 to 12 in PvP, most people didn't even bother raising their voice, thinking it wasn't affecting them as PvE players. Here you go, so much for let sleeping dogs lie. Another good lesson why this community should stand together pvpers and pvers.

Well kinda different as some pvp players enjoy 12 players groups opposed to 24 ones. Even if it's no sense.

I know. It is never 100% unanimity. But tell that to the pugs, or newcomers who want to taste pvp and mostly end up frustrated and never return.

Varana

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

... groups larger than such have no purpose for said size outside of communication.

Hmm, I don't know - I find ease of communication between large-ish groups of players pretty nice in a "massively multiplayer" game.

Vlad9425

DreadDaedroth wrote: »

Knockmaker wrote: »

When we were strongly arguing against the group size reduction from 24 to 12 in PvP, most people didn't even bother raising their voice, thinking it wasn't affecting them as PvE players. Here you go, so much for let sleeping dogs lie. Another good lesson why this community should stand together pvpers and pvers.

Well kinda different as some pvp players enjoy 12 players groups opposed to 24 ones. Even if it's no sense.

Yes “some” people enjoy the smaller groups while the majority of people don’t.

dotme

Unless the game is so big that the servers can no longer handle 24-person groups, this really makes no sense to me at all.

No explanation in the notes either. And yes, the impact of this in PvP on pick-up groups for new players has been generally very detrimental. Sometimes it would be really nice to get an explanation of the thinking behind some of these changes.

oddbasket

We need more alphabets in Alik'r now.

VaranisArano

dotme wrote: »

Unless the game is so big that the servers can no longer handle 24-person groups, this really makes no sense to me at all.

No explanation in the notes either. And yes, the impact of this in PvP on pick-up groups for new players has been generally very detrimental. Sometimes it would be really nice to get an explanation of the thinking behind some of these changes.

Well, from experience in Cyrodiil, just because you no longer have 24-person groups doesn't mean you can't have lots of players in one place.

Which is what befuddled me about this change.

Does ZOS think that less players will zerg at the Alkir Dolmens if they lower the group size?

Because, again, their experience in Cyrodiil should tell them otherwise - you don't have to be in large groups to zerg in large numbers.

ArcVelarian

Once a change makes it on the PTS that means that there's a 90% chance that it will make it to Live. Between this and the lack of buffs to DKs it's enough to make me walk away from ESO for another year.

BlueRaven

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Aren’t drops capped at 12 ppl for the purposes of everything but Dolmens, Harrowstorms, Geysers, etc? And for that matter aren’t public dungeons also capped at 12?

This change really only affects a small segment of the population and is easily worked around. 95% to 98% of the time players aren’t in groups larger than 12 (outside of pre Cyro changes) and this is probably just cementing the fact that sets are now designed to cap at 12 max and groups larger than such have no purpose for said size outside of communication.

With our wb groups it’s more about getting achievements by clearing the zone. And getting xp.
Also the more experienced players in the group tends to hold back the dps so the newer players can get the drops.
It really is a great wb group, as it bridges multiple guilds and is run multiple times a day.

Also in my housing guild we do tours with extra prizes given out for those in attendance. This attendance is for people in the group.

big_ear_midget

This is one of the worst changes I have seen. My guild runs a weekly world boss event, I typically have 18+ people in a group as we run around and kill the bosses, so now i will apparently have to run two groups? ZOS, please reconsider this horrible change.

Ackwalan

Has no affect on PvE. If you can't defeat a WB with 12, or even multiple groups of 12, you are doing it wrong. For RP, housing tours or any other non-combat group activity you can use multiple groups.

VaranisArano

Ackwalan wrote: »

Has no affect on PvE. If you can't defeat a WB with 12, or even multiple groups of 12, you are doing it wrong. For RP, housing tours or any other non-combat group activity you can use multiple groups.

But then you can't use group chat to talk, chat, give directions and organize. You'd end up crowding guild chat or forced to use an outside program.

And from PVP, it's a lot harder to keep track of players who are in your "group" but don't actually have the group chevron. That's kind of important if you are waiting to make sure that everyone is there.

If you are sharing dailies, you can only share quests with group members, so that reduced as well.

Now, maybe that's fine by you, but it's a significant reduction in QOL for guilds who used to just be able to use group chat.

JamieAubrey

Haha welcome to our world

So is it 12 + 12 companions = which is still 24 or is it 6 with 6 companions

BlueRaven

Ackwalan wrote: »

Has no affect on PvE. If you can't defeat a WB with 12, or even multiple groups of 12, you are doing it wrong. For RP, housing tours or any other non-combat group activity you can use multiple groups.

It’s not a question of being unable to down it. The wb group leader can down bosses on his own. But guiding new players can be like herding kittens. Mounts don’t all go the same speed, players dc, etc.
You can see if everyone is at the boss by seeing where they are on the map.

zaria

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Aren’t drops capped at 12 ppl for the purposes of everything but Dolmens, Harrowstorms, Geysers, etc? And for that matter aren’t public dungeons also capped at 12?

This change really only affects a small segment of the population and is easily worked around. 95% to 98% of the time players aren’t in groups larger than 12 (outside of pre Cyro changes) and this is probably just cementing the fact that sets are now designed to cap at 12 max and groups larger than such have no purpose for said size outside of communication.

Drops has been limited to 12 for an long time this is independent on group size just number of players on boss.
this is not very relevant for an social event.

Also the 12 man groups in Cyrodil makes its very hard to get into pug groups there.
Two reasons 1) limited numbers of people who run dedicated pug groups and with 24 man well you are 8 in a group who is small so you could take in 10 randoms and still have rooms for 4 guildmates, the 12 man limit and you do not invite randoms as you need room for the latecomers.
Performance is not an issue overland unless you play on an potato.
Stupid change.

scorpius2k1

Well this is going cause a major reduction in Alik'r group dps (dolmens per second). /s

Kwoung

Ackwalan wrote: »

Has no affect on PvE. If you can't defeat a WB with 12, or even multiple groups of 12, you are doing it wrong. For RP, housing tours or any other non-combat group activity you can use multiple groups.

So, I will assume you are under the impression that ESO is entirely about killing things and there isn't a HUGE number of players that participate in social events? I can tell you with 100% certainty that you are mistaken. This game has quite a large number of folks that group for social events, which sometimes is also about guild zone clears. We are well aware that not everyone will get loot, we do it to have fun together and get the achievements.

xaraan

Glad for this change personally, same as I was to see it in pvp. And any pve complaints ive seen so far can be easily worked around.

Kwoung

xaraan wrote: »

Glad for this change personally, same as I was to see it in pvp. And any pve complaints ive seen so far can be easily worked around.

Just curious, how exactly have 24 person groups negatively affected you for you to be so happy about the change? What problem have you experienced that this change will solve and suddenly bring joy to your gameplay?

BlueRaven

xaraan wrote: »

Glad for this change personally, same as I was to see it in pvp. And any pve complaints ive seen so far can be easily worked around.

Not really. You can’t share quests across two separate groups.

xaraan

Kwoung wrote: »

xaraan wrote: »

Glad for this change personally, same as I was to see it in pvp. And any pve complaints ive seen so far can be easily worked around.

Just curious, how exactly have 24 person groups negatively affected you for you to be so happy about the change? What problem have you experienced that this change will solve and suddenly bring joy to your gameplay?

Mainly don't care for the zergs farming stuff in pve like dolmens, if this cuts it down even a little or splits it up then it's a positive change.

But more than anything, I think 12 was the way it should have been from the start, glad they capped it at that for pvp a while back and trials stops there. Which leaves us with no official content that has larger than 12 man groups. So changing it elsewhere just seems more uniform and will let players understand that 12 is the defacto max group size.

If you want to do other things with more than 12 in pve, it's very very VERY easy to coordinate two or more 12 man groups in comms for things like housing tours, world boss farming, etc.

Kwoung

xaraan wrote: »

Kwoung wrote: »

xaraan wrote: »

Glad for this change personally, same as I was to see it in pvp. And any pve complaints ive seen so far can be easily worked around.

Just curious, how exactly have 24 person groups negatively affected you for you to be so happy about the change? What problem have you experienced that this change will solve and suddenly bring joy to your gameplay?

Mainly don't care for the zergs farming stuff in pve like dolmens, if this cuts it down even a little or splits it up then it's a positive change.

But more than anything, I think 12 was the way it should have been from the start, glad they capped it at that for pvp a while back and trials stops there. Which leaves us with no official content that has larger than 12 man groups. So changing it elsewhere just seems more uniform and will let players understand that 12 is the defacto max group size.

If you want to do other things with more than 12 in pve, it's very very VERY easy to coordinate two or more 12 man groups in comms for things like housing tours, world boss farming, etc.

So it doesn't affect your gameplay then? You simply don't feel that players should have a choice about how many friends they adventure with? Personally I don't like/enjoy 4 man content, maybe that should go away as well... because well, I just don't like it.

xaraan

Kwoung wrote: »

xaraan wrote: »

Kwoung wrote: »

xaraan wrote: »

Glad for this change personally, same as I was to see it in pvp. And any pve complaints ive seen so far can be easily worked around.

Just curious, how exactly have 24 person groups negatively affected you for you to be so happy about the change? What problem have you experienced that this change will solve and suddenly bring joy to your gameplay?

Mainly don't care for the zergs farming stuff in pve like dolmens, if this cuts it down even a little or splits it up then it's a positive change.

But more than anything, I think 12 was the way it should have been from the start, glad they capped it at that for pvp a while back and trials stops there. Which leaves us with no official content that has larger than 12 man groups. So changing it elsewhere just seems more uniform and will let players understand that 12 is the defacto max group size.

If you want to do other things with more than 12 in pve, it's very very VERY easy to coordinate two or more 12 man groups in comms for things like housing tours, world boss farming, etc.

So it doesn't affect your gameplay then? You simply don't feel that players should have a choice about how many friends they adventure with? Personally I don't like/enjoy 4 man content, maybe that should go away as well... because well, I just don't like it.

It's pretty easy to read what I said. If you have to build a straw man out of it, then you don't have much of an argument.

I get that others don't like the change, but I notice in these threads (been a few of them due to the change in pvp as well) that those of us that like the change and think the size should be 12 often don't bother to comment. So I wanted to comment and say there are A LOT of us out there that agree with this change. Of both my pvp and pve guildies not one disagrees with the group change size. But none of us usually bother commenting in these threads so it looks like just a bunch of people that all think the change is bad and they don't seem to understand why it's no reversed. So just pointing out there are a lot of us out there that do agree with group size capping at 12.